Apple has now identified eight of Samsung's devices that it wants to have banned from sale in the US following its patent victory last week. But while the jury in Apple's court case against Samsung said Samsung had willfully infringed in most cases, Apple has apparently focused its attention on devices that are mostly unavailable in the US already.

Apple's list of devices it wants to ban, published on Monday afternoon, is as follows:

Galaxy S 4G

Galaxy S2 AT&T

Galaxy S2 Skyrocket

Galaxy S2 T-Mobile

Galaxy S2 Epic 4G

Galaxy S Showcase

Droid Charge

Galaxy Prevail

Some devices in the Galaxy S2 series can still be purchased for free or cheap through certain carriers—for example, AT&T currently offers the Galaxy S2 Skyrocket as a refurbished model for $9.99 (with two-year contract). T-Mobile still allows users to buy a Galaxy S2 for $150 (also with contract). But Samsung has come out with newer devices since the trial started last year; as such, the phones on the list are already on their way out in terms of popularity, so the impact of a ban may be minimal.

Earlier on Monday, Samsung published an internal memo to employees about last week's verdict. The company vowed to continue its legal fight against Apple and said it plans to prove itself as the market leader. Apple issued its own memo declaring that "values have won," but there's plenty left to hash out after the court decision. The jury awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages—a number that has the potential to go up—and Samsung is currently in the process of filing its appeals.

Google also issued a statement related to the decision. The company argues that most of the alleged infringements aren't related to the core part of Android, but said "[t]he court of appeals will review both infringement and the validity of the patent claims." The company went on: "The mobile industry is moving fast and all players—including newcomers—are building upon ideas that have been around for decades. We work with our partners to give consumers innovative and affordable products, and we don’t want anything to limit that."

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

So given that if you tried just a little bit you could get the Galaxy S3 for $100 at one point, and I paid $150 with a Radio Shack promotion on what should have bee $200 on contract, I could totally see Samsung simply giving Apple the finger and dropping the prices on the S3 and sell even more of them negating the effect this possible import ban might have.

I will never buy apple and I think android phones suck too. APPLE IS DESTROYING THE WORLD ONE PATENT SUIT AT A TIME.

The reason electronic products today are so disappointing is because these patents don't allow for standards to develop fast enough. Patents are bad for the consumer when they are abuse by bully's like apple.

Is the Windows Phone 8 not competition? Is it not differentiated from the iPhone? Is it not innovation?

It's all those things

And the instant it gains more than 1-2% market share, Apple WILL sue, mark my words. I mean, the tiles are CLEARLY a grid of icons. There's even a little phone icon on the phone app! And I don't know about all Windows Phones, but my Lumia is definitely black and has a bezel.

"Like the trade dress -- once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flat screen with the bezel...then you go down the products to see if it had a bezel."-Actual quote from juror.

dru, do you seriously consider WP8 competition? There is a reason it doesn't sell, and it's because nobody wants it (or at least they think they don't want it. Maybe they could take some pointers from Apple here themselves).

Android is the only competition, and Samsung is the champion. I do believe Samsung deserved a slap down for their blatant copying of the iPhone, but that doesn't mean they aren't just trying to sue the competition out of existence.

My wife has a Droid Charge. It doesn't remotely look like an iPhone, and none of her friends have ever confused it with one. It's not even a rectangle (the bottom edge is curved)...

It's sought for ban for design and utility patents, not trade dress. That's why. Most of these devices are slightly dated anyway and anyone looking for a 'newer' Samsung smartphone most likely would buy the S3 (like myself) instead of an S or S2 . In the end it won't matter because by the time (if) they get a ban Samsung will have already moved on to newer devices that don't "infringe".

And the instant it gains more than 1-2% market share, Apple WILL sue, mark my words.

It is rather sad that the Android fans are unable to see that the Samsung Galaxy S/S2 are extremely similar to the iPhone 3GS, and that that doesn't apply to the S3 (or basically any other smartphone on the market).

I'm not really clear on why Apple wouldn't try and ban the S3, which would have more impact, if they thought they could.

Skiddywinks wrote:

but that doesn't mean they aren't just trying to sue the competition out of existence.

So why miss the Galaxy S3 from the lawsuit?

Surely it is more likely that Apple just wanted to stop the blatant copying?

And the instant it gains more than 1-2% market share, Apple WILL sue, mark my words.

It is rather sad that the Android fans are unable to see that the Samsung Galaxy S/S2 are extremely similar to the iPhone 3GS, and that that doesn't apply to the S3 (or basically any other smartphone on the market).

I'm not really clear on why Apple wouldn't try and ban the S3, which would have more impact, if they thought they could.

Not that I'm a fan of either company but it's just as sad to see the Apple fans turn a blind eye to the fact that Samsungs prototype designs that pre-date the iPhone still looking much like the S/S2. *shrugs* People see and hear what they want to fit their own agenda.

And the instant it gains more than 1-2% market share, Apple WILL sue, mark my words.

It is rather sad that the Android fans are unable to see that the Samsung Galaxy S/S2 are extremely similar to the iPhone 3GS, and that that doesn't apply to the S3 (or basically any other smartphone on the market).

I'm not really clear on why Apple wouldn't try and ban the S3, which would have more impact, if they thought they could.

Not that I'm a fan of either company but it's just as sad to see the Apple fans turn a blind eye to the fact that Samsungs prototype designs that pre-date the iPhone still looking much like the S/S2. *shrugs* People see and hear what they want to fit their own agenda.

It's equally sad that you can't see that the prototypes also lack the infringing App Drawer and bounce animation. Blind eye indeed. The majority of the case rested on how similar the software looked.

Give it a rest with the "Rounded Rectangles" business. That was one of the few points where they lost in court. The ban is based on all of the OTHER trademark and patent claims that were upheld.

Also, the jury did NOT ignore prior art, they skipped it at first and came back to it later. The comment by the juror has been taken grossly out of context. The prior art was given due consideration by the jury. You've been suckered in by a little bit of anti-apple bias (which is healthy), and bad reporting (which is not).

You'd think some internet commenters work for the Chinese/Korean KIRF companies themselves with the way they have no zero regard for design, trade dress, or brand integrity.

No wonder places like Walmart are so popular. No one cares who loses in the long term as long as they get their cheap Asian knock-offs of the name brand products. Samesung willfully rips off a competitors product, their entire line of products no less, right down to the icons, packaging, and stores they are sold in and all some of you can say is "Herp derp! I guess no one can make rectangle phones any more!"

No, Windows Phone really isn't any competition to the iPhone. And considering its success, it's not as "innovative" as it is "different - and bad."

People need to stop throwing out MS as an example of how you can make smartphones differently. Its horrible failure after years in the marketplace shows that, no, it's NOT a viable alternative.

Its lack of sales success doesn't make it any less viable of an alternative. It's a unique design, it performs all the functions of a smartphone well, and it's backed by one of the largest companies on the planet. That Microsoft was late to the party and faces a tough, uphill battle to gain market/mindshare is a separate problem altogether, although I'd certainly trust Microsoft's ability to remain a going concern, able to support their products, longer than someone like HTC, which has struggled against Samsung and other competitors in the Android space as of late.

(I'm not suggesting HTC is going out of business -- they're a strong company too -- but few companies have the resources, money, and muscle of Microsoft)

And the instant it gains more than 1-2% market share, Apple WILL sue, mark my words.

It is rather sad that the Android fans are unable to see that the Samsung Galaxy S/S2 are extremely similar to the iPhone 3GS, and that that doesn't apply to the S3 (or basically any other smartphone on the market).

I'm not really clear on why Apple wouldn't try and ban the S3, which would have more impact, if they thought they could.

It is rather sad that you just immediately assume anyone who thinks Apple's patent trolling is absurd is an Android fan. If you had bothered to read more than three words into my post, you would have seen the phrase "my Lumia," which last I checked was not an Android device.

I do have a friend with an AT&T GSII though, and there is no way it could ever possibly be confused with an iPhone 3G/3GS. It's much bigger, doesn't have any physical face buttons, has a lip near the base of the textured back, with very visible camera pod, doesn't have any chrome borders (it's all black, but of course if you shine a flashbulb at it it looks vaguely chrome, like anything else would), and perhaps most importantly isn't completely falling apart after 1 year of use like my old iPhone 3G did.

Can you say with a straight face this is a "blatant copy" of the iPhone 3G? And hey, you want to talk about "blatant copying," how are you enjoying that iOS5 notification shade?

Omitting Galaxy S3 from this list is a small ray of hope. Perhaps Apple believes the Galaxy S3 doesn't infringe the patents above? If so, there's a future for Samsung and Android.

The Galaxy S3 is an excellent phone and good competition to the iPhone. It has many of the generic design factors that Apple has claimed in patents (rectangular face covered by a screen, few physical buttons, grid of rectangles with rounded corners, etc), but Apple isn't trying to block its sale in the US.

If Apple doesn't block the S3, then it won't block other phones that resemble the S3 more than they resemble the iPhone, and thus all manufacturers (Apple, Samsung, HTC, Nokia, etc) can move forward.

I'm not surprised a Samsung defender would misrepresent the juror's quote. They absolutely considered prior art and assumed there was prior art--it's in the quote--they set the first one aside and moved to the next thing because it was bogging them down; obviously they came back to it because they reached a verdict on it. That quote is cherry-picked and misrepresents the jury's work.

Just admit your feel self-entitled to Apple's design work without wanting to admit you're a 'gay Apple fantard' or any of the other crass, pithy labels placed on satisfied Apple product owners. Apple envy? Pft. You're above that! You're not a sheep! You value freedom and openness! Blahblahblah!